Talk:Exotic Shorthair

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revision as of 20:12, 12 February 2025 by 81.2.123.64 (talk) (WP:NOTAFORUM (also refactor))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Latest comment: 2 December 2010 by 75.130.165.244 in topic Hearing Loss?
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:WikiProject banner shell

Hearing Loss?

The first statement purports that they have been known to cause hearing loss in owners...yet further down it states that they seldom meow. Without making noise, how can they possibly cause hearing loss? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.130.165.244 (talk) 11:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Persian

In this context, should persian be lowercase? Tuf-Kat

If 50% of a litter is likely to have a different coat than is desired, doesn't that mean that the "breed" doesn't breed true (all offsprings have the same characteristics)? And if it doesn't breed true, that would mean that it isn't a fully developed breed. [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 15:23, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

just plain wrong

the 50% statement is an error. Exotics breed true and have been accepted for showing in the US for quite a while. THey are far from the original cross. Pschemp 14:11, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the correct info, I was wondering about that. [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 14:26, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Breeding True

Unless a homozygous shorthair is bred to a homozygous shorthair, there is an even greater possibility than 50% of having longhair kittens in a litter. Sometimes all of the kittens can be longhair. --Stacyrp 15:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)stacyrpReply

And most exotics now bred are homozygous shorthair. In fact, longhairs are not allowed into the breed as outcrosses anymore. pschemp | talk 03:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Garfield not an Exotic

I have removed Garfield from the section of film appearance(s) because Garfield is computer animated in the movie, and his breed has never been specified. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 12:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply